4 ms·
Certainly there are plenty of institutions hoping to influence the media to report stories in a particular way. However, that fact doesn't address the suggestio
by alisonatwork 7y ago
Certainly there are plenty of institutions hoping to influence the media to report stories in a particular way. However, that fact doesn't address the suggestion of the original poster, which was that the media as a whole is deliberately trying to find stories of Chinese doom and gloom. I don't think that's true.
Putting aside the fact that in countries with a free press it's hard to ascribe any one outlook to the media as a whole, my feeling is that most media organizations do honestly hope to inform their readers. But there is lots of information out there, and there are editorial decisions to be made around what makes the cut or how deep to dig on a story. There is no objective way to make those decisions, although presumably the interests of the readers are considered.
Of course, it's no big secret that editors and reporters are biased, or that they can be influenced. Fortunately in countries where there is freedom of speech, people have the freedom to report on that too.
The thing about China specifically is that people in other countries are hungry for information on China because it is a rising global superpower. So it makes sense that the media wants to jump on any China story they can get. Unfortunately, due to the circumstances i mentioned before, good stories on China are thin on the ground. As a result i think there is probably too much hearsay and propaganda (from whatever side) seeping into the reporting. I don't think that's deliberate on the media's behalf, i think it's more just a result of them being hobbled by a regime that is actively hostile to press freedom.
- acqq 7y ago> I don't think that's deliberate on the media's behalf And I'm sure it is deliberate. Like I've said, not only the editors deliberately select the news, what will be covered and how it will be covered, there are agencies producing the news that the media "just covers" but having established preferences of how the coverage is supposed to be. I was also ignorant about the phenomenon until I was directly in the location being covered. Then I've discovered that it is known that "the news are correct, except about the stuff I'm being directly involved with." I'm just reading the front page of one local newspaper of one European country which spends almost no ink on coronavirus topic (and I know more than one president or prime minister was also doing the same until only a few days ago). Even avoiding to mention some facts is an editorial policy. In the cases of misinformation about China, repeating unproven information or even giving it any attention at all, and especially using that for titles is as a deliberate act as any other is. There's nothing "accidental" there.